Slashdot Mirror


China Now Top Patent Filer

smitty777 writes "China has passed the U.S. as the number-one filer of patents this year, according to a report by Thompson Reuters. With an average annual increase of 16.7%, China has filed 314,000 patents last year. This brings the total share of China in worldwide holdings up from 54% to 58%. However, according to legal expert Elliot Papageorgiou: 'One thing is volume, quality is quite another. The return, or the percentage of grants, of the patents is still not as high in China as, say, in the U.S., Japan or some places in Europe.' This was also a record year for patent filing over all, according to the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). According to their numbers, worldwide patent applications are up 7.2%, at 1.98 million in 2010. FTA: 'WIPO Director General Francis Gurry on Tuesday attributed the rise to the "knowledge economy" and globalization led by U.S. and Chinese innovation.'"

135 comments

  1. First post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Whopdeedoo.

    Like most of China's academic papers these patents will also be worthless garbage.

    1. Re:First post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good, now we can steal them back!

    2. Re:First post by demiurg · · Score: 1

      Patent quality not always matters, sheer numbers often are more important. As patents for certain technologies are counted in thousands, do you really think somebody can actually evaluate all these patents? Have you tried to read a patent and figure out what it is about? Patents are written in such way that it takes a lot of time to analyze. This is way in the end what counts is the number of patents, not the quality - nobody can evaluate the quality of say 10K patents.

  2. Quality by Nerdfest · · Score: 4, Funny

    They're complaining about the quality of Chinese patents?

    1. Re:Quality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Thats like 1 in every 3000 people having created something worthy of a patent.

      I call bullshit on that.

    2. Re:Quality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats like 1 in every 3000 people having created something worthy of a patent.

      I call bullshit on that.

      Yeah, the USA rate of 1 patent in every 1000 people , per year, is much more reasonable. The Chinese are slacking.

    3. Re:Quality by ackthpt · · Score: 4, Funny

      Thats like 1 in every 3000 people having created something worthy of a patent.

      I call bullshit on that.

      Yeah, the USA rate of 1 patent in every 1000 people , per year, is much more reasonable. The Chinese are slacking.

      Patent Applied for: Left-handed Veeblefetzer goes 10 feet, stops.

      Patent Applied for: Left-handed Veeblefetzer goes 10 feet, turns left.

      Patent Applied for: Left-handed Veeblefetzer goes 10 feet, turns rightt.

      Patent Applied for: Left-handed Veeblefetzer goes 10 feet, goes down.

      Patent Applied for: Left-handed Veeblefetzer goes 10 feet, goes up.

      Patent Applied for: Left-handed Veeblefetzer goes 10 feet, turns around, goes 10 feet.

      Patent Applied for: Right-handed Veeblefetzer goes 10 feet, stops.

      Patent Applied for: Right-handed Veeblefetzer goes 10 feet, turns left.

      Patent Applied for: Right-handed Veeblefetzer goes 10 feet, turns rightt.

      Patent Applied for: Right-handed Veeblefetzer goes 10 feet, goes down.

      Patent Applied for: Right-handed Veeblefetzer goes 10 feet, goes up.

      Patent Applied for: Right-handed Veeblefetzer goes 10 feet, turns around, goes 10 feet.

      Patent Applied for: Left-handed Veeblefetzer goes 20 feet, stops.

      Patent Applied for: Left-handed Veeblefetzer goes 20 feet, turns left.

      Patent Applied for: Left-handed Veeblefetzer goes 20 feet, turns rightt.

      Patent Applied for: Left-handed Veeblefetzer goes 20 feet, goes down.

      Patent Applied for: Left-handed Veeblefetzer goes 20 feet, goes up.

      Patent Applied for: Left-handed Veeblefetzer goes 20 feet, turns around, goes 20 feet.

      Patent Applied for: Right-handed Veeblefetzer goes 20 feet, stops.

      Patent Applied for: Right-handed Veeblefetzer goes 20 feet, turns left.

      Patent Applied for: Right-handed Veeblefetzer goes 20 feet, turns rightt.

      Patent Applied for: Right-handed Veeblefetzer goes 20 feet, goes down.

      Patent Applied for: Right-handed Veeblefetzer goes 20 feet, goes up.

      Patent Applied for: Right-handed Veeblefetzer goes 20 feet, turns around, goes 20 feet.

      ...

      Yeah, they'll lock up all the Veeblefetzer and you'll be stuck making do with a Potrzebie

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    4. Re:Quality by ifiwereasculptor · · Score: 1

      I don't care, as long as the Potrzebie is also cromulent.

    5. Re:Quality by Taty'sEyes · · Score: 1

      I think they measure in meters there.... SMile

      --
      We show geeks how to get their dream girl at EyesOfOdessa.com
    6. Re:Quality by rossdee · · Score: 2

      I think they measure in metres there.
      A meter is a device. a metre is a unit of length. (At least in the rest of the world.outside USA)

    7. Re:Quality by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      I pretty sure that not all the rest of the world outside the US speaks English.

    8. Re:Quality by SharkLaser · · Score: 1

      If you want to try to correct someone, at least make sure you're right. It's spelled meters everywhere I've been (no I haven't been to UK).

    9. Re:Quality by nikanth · · Score: 1

      They're complaining about the quality of Chinese patents?

      Keep in mind that all the original brands are also made in China

    10. Re:Quality by nfras · · Score: 2

      If you want to try to correct someone, at least make sure you're right. It's spelled meters everywhere I've been (no I haven't been to UK).

      Looks like you've only ever been in the US then

      --
      You call me a pedant? I prefer the term "correct"
    11. Re:Quality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Poland 'metre' is called 'metr'

    12. Re:Quality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its nothing about the quality, this is a DDoS attack on the patent system.

    13. Re:Quality by Whiteox · · Score: 1

      Yeah. I have the same issue when I read Liter, which is acceptable in US English.

      --
      Don't be apathetic. Procrastinate!
    14. Re:Quality by Filip22012005 · · Score: 3, Informative

      You wikipedia page doesn't say that at all. Some languages that also spell "meter" (from the left-hand frame):
      - Afrikaans
      - Allemanisch
      - Bahasa Banjar
      - Dansk
      - Deutch
      - Frysk
      - Bahasa Indonesia
      - Limburgs
      - Lumbaart
      - Bahasa Melayu
      - Nederlands
      - Norsk

      --
      When the policeman of the tie, rule you violate, hello punishment of the kitty?
    15. Re:Quality by kikito · · Score: 1

      I'm not in USA and it's also meters for me. I had a USA English teacher.

      Also, the libraries I use on my daily work (programming) all use meters, colors, and flavors.

    16. Re:Quality by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      In Poland 'metre' is called 'metr'

      That's just being lazy.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    17. Re:Quality by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      If you want to try to correct someone, at least make sure you're right. It's spelled metres everywhere I've been (except the USA).

    18. Re:Quality by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      Meter I can kinda accept, but liter just looks weird every time I look at it. It can't be a real word...

  3. This, finally, will bring sanity to the system by timeOday · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The US will not be so lenient in granting patents for everything stupid little thing when it benefits non-US companies as much or more than our own.

    I suppose bias against Chinese-originated patents could stifle this... but I suppose they will just create shell companies to work around that.

    1. Re:This, finally, will bring sanity to the system by OliWarner · · Score: 2

      Isn't it more likely that patriotic USPTO staff will just rush through any old rubbish (worse than now) to make sure every vague hint of an idea is owned by the US?

    2. Re:This, finally, will bring sanity to the system by Kenja · · Score: 2

      No, the US will just patent ALL the stupid stuff first! Do you want us to have a PATENT GAP! Well DO YOU!

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    3. Re:This, finally, will bring sanity to the system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The USPTO stance is that if you want to get a shoddy patent they'll let you, but it's your ass in court if it's easily invalidated. The problem is that the courts are reluctant to invalidate the bogus patents because they don't know the technology well enough.

    4. Re:This, finally, will bring sanity to the system by Idbar · · Score: 1

      At least, if not, it's going to be a interesting DoS attack to the USPTO. Filing at a large rate will either require more people to actually go through them carefully or simply a reform of the process. Which may come with a reform to the system.

    5. Re:This, finally, will bring sanity to the system by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      Yes, I do.

  4. What's a "knowledge economy"? by cmv1087 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is it where companies hoard patents on irrelevant things and use them to sue the pants off competitors?

    1. Re:What's a "knowledge economy"? by Nerdfest · · Score: 2

      Yes. Also known as the economy where you can only actually make money if you're a lawyer, right up until the economy crashes. I give it seven years.

    2. Re:What's a "knowledge economy"? by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      If it were irrelevant, nobody else would want to use it.

    3. Re:What's a "knowledge economy"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It's where you make knowledge a scare resource so that you can apply the term "economy" to it.

    4. Re:What's a "knowledge economy"? by c0lo · · Score: 1

      Is it where companies hoard patents on irrelevant things and use them to sue the pants off competitors?

      It reckon depends on the type of knowledge: patent lawyers will surely have it, they'll be surely benefiting from this economy.

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    5. Re:What's a "knowledge economy"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it where companies hoard patents on irrelevant things and use them to sue the pants off competitors?

      It's where almost everyone is unemployed, nothing tangible is produced, and the executives rake in huge quantities of cash, regardless of success or failure.

    6. Re:What's a "knowledge economy"? by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      Unless you can patent such an economy, in which case I give it 20 years.

    7. Re:What's a "knowledge economy"? by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      As a math teacher, I can assure you that my students find mathematical knowledge to be a scare resource. :-)

    8. Re:What's a "knowledge economy"? by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      Is it where companies hoard patents on irrelevant things and use them to sue the pants off competitors?

      Let them wear skirts!

    9. Re:What's a "knowledge economy"? by anubi · · Score: 1

      Well, now that there has been so much concern about recognizing information as a "property", isn't it time the tax law recognizes it as property as well?

      Paying property tax gives me the right to tell the homeless guy he can't erect his tent on my land. Our government is giving out the right to tell others what they can and cannot do. Do they pay anything for the right?

      This whole thing just seems to be a "barrier to entry" to keep competition at bay. Instead of working, our people either turn to the welfare rolls or accept employment at whatever terms from those who have agreements with Government to allow production.

      This will go on as long as the rest of the world honors a United States Dollar. We don't have to earn 'em. We just print them.

      But really, to me, a lot of this stuff seems about as asinine as McDonalds suing Burger King because the process of putting a hamburger patty in a bun is a intellectual property right.

      We've laid minefields of lawsuits. And we are blowing up the draft animals who pull the plow.

      --
      "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]

    10. Re:What's a "knowledge economy"? by cmv1087 · · Score: 1

      Let them wear skirts!

      It's a kilt, damnit!

    11. Re:What's a "knowledge economy"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A knowledge economy is infotainment. Duh!

    12. Re:What's a "knowledge economy"? by kikito · · Score: 1

      Interesting idea. Patenting troll patenting.

  5. Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In other news, the RIAA was found to have the largest amount of pirated songs downloaded.

  6. of course numbers are up by StealthHunter · · Score: 1

    companies are winning lawsuits on "clicking a phone number in an email in order to dial the number" and "switching to an app while on the phone." companies would be mad not to try to patent every tiny user interface action, technical revision, bugfix, etc. regardless of prior art or novelty. prediction, 2012 will be even bigger!!!

    1. Re:of course numbers are up by click2005 · · Score: 1

      Its payout lottery. Buy a patent and you might win big. Why not buy tens of thousands of them like some companies do.

      --
      I am a free slashdotter. I will not be modded, blogged, DRM'd, patented, podcasted or RFID'd. My life is my own.
    2. Re:of course numbers are up by c0lo · · Score: 1

      Its payout lottery. Buy a patent and you might win big. Why not buy tens of thousands of them like some companies do.

      In other news - it doesn't help you still need to pay MS the extortion money.

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    3. Re:of course numbers are up by perryizgr8 · · Score: 1

      don't forget rectangular screen with rounded corners.

      --
      Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
  7. US has patents mostly because of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    The US has patents mostly because of foreign researchers in the US. When Chinese / Indians / Russians / Israili / Singaporeans / others discover they no longer have to go to US for research work, the US will have almost nothing.

    1. Re:US has patents mostly because of... by viperidaenz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because those companies with a butt load a patents - ibm, microsoft, apple - are not american companies?

    2. Re:US has patents mostly because of... by dbIII · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not for years. They are very much multinationals - for instance IBM has a lot of staff in China working remotely on systems that are not in China.

    3. Re:US has patents mostly because of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There is no such thing as an American company. Corporations are not physical entities, they have no national loyalty. They are not supporting any national economy. They are parasites that are only serving themselves. Any benefit to the host country is purely accidental.

    4. Re:US has patents mostly because of... by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      I imagine they would still file US patents for research they develop in China. I bet a US patent would hold more weight in a US court than a Chinese patent

    5. Re:US has patents mostly because of... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      TFA is about US Patents applied for from China!!!!

    6. Re:US has patents mostly because of... by LaRainette · · Score: 1

      True. But the reason why these people emmigrated to the US to do R&D in american companies is because the pay is better and this condition hasn't changed.
      Or rather hasn't changed enough yet. I don't think there is any Chinese company who can rival IBM's R&D, or Intel's.

    7. Re:US has patents mostly because of... by LaRainette · · Score: 1

      Can you actually read ?
      He said foreign "researchers". Yes these are american companies. And how many american researchers do they have ?

    8. Re:US has patents mostly because of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet a US patent would hold more weight in a US court than a Chinese patent

      And people wonder why the patent system doesn't work.
      A Chinese patent is just as valid as a US patent you fucking racist.

    9. Re:US has patents mostly because of... by viperidaenz · · Score: 2

      Wrong. Its about the number of patents filed in the China Patent Office vs United States Patent Office

    10. Re:US has patents mostly because of... by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Patents valid under the laws of one country may not be valid in another. Trying using wishy washy american software patents in europe

    11. Re:US has patents mostly because of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US has patents mostly because of foreign researchers in the US. When Chinese / Indians / Russians / Israili / Singaporeans / others discover they no longer have to go to US for research work, the US will have almost nothing.

      And because of a lot of crap patents and stolen patents.

      US patent history, from an European perspective
        -> c:a 1965 No respect for patents (especially if it is patents filed by foreign companies in USA), nobody files patents, because they won' t help.
        -> c:a 1987 Ignore most patent filings from foreign actors, but accept the same patent if a domestic company later files it (even if it is an verbatim copy of the foreign patent filing). If the first party then show their foreign patents and their first, refused, patent application, ignore them. If a foreign entity tries to uphold a US patent (bought, because it was almost impossible for foreign entities to get patents accepted in USA), ignore them.
        -> Today. Accept all patents from US based entities, no matter how crappy they are. Ignore all patents filings from foreign entities, if you can get away with it. If a foreign entity tries to uphold a US patent, ignore them and obstruct them with legal technicalities.

    12. Re:US has patents mostly because of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because Europeans are all filthy, unwashed pirates, amirite?

      It's the other way around, mate. European patents hold ZERO sway in the US, your companies rip us off as a matter of routine. YOUR patents are, however, respected in the EU so long as they do not directly contravene basic human rights or the treaty of Rome upon which the EU was founded in the first place.

      But I'm sure the whole world is out to get you.

    13. Re:US has patents mostly because of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't have a clue how patents work, do you?

  8. Haha, oops :) by youn · · Score: 5, Interesting

    hopefully the us gets an incentive to fix the patent system. China is as entitled to patents as any other country... but the fact that the usa does not want to be deadlocked by china may give an incentive to fix the patent system :)

    --
    Never antropomorphize computers, they do not like that :p
    1. Re:Haha, oops :) by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      These patents are being filed in the Chinese patent system.

      Enforcement in China? Priceless.

    2. Re:Haha, oops :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? Are you kidding me? For a country that enforces no patent protection whatsoever...I find it hard to believe we are even accepting China's patents. They steal, copy and forge software, movies, and anything of value with absolutely no enforcement. I'm not talking about downloading a movie, or song..I'm talking about opening whole stores dedicated to pirated/forged Apple Stores, Microsoft software for download, hacking computers and companies alike backed by the Chinese government.

    3. Re:Haha, oops :) by nzac · · Score: 1

      These patents are being filed in the Chinese patent system.

      Enforcement in China? Priceless.

      If they let all patents though and enforce it, along with forcing Chinese manufacturers to provide cheep products to China then they can can lock the US and others out of ever equalizing the tech trade imbalance.
      And since the government can control the courts they can influence the patents that stay valid.
      Of course that's just the begging and it would annoy a lot of people.

    4. Re:Haha, oops :) by Surt · · Score: 1

      So you're thinking the US will withdraw from the WIPO?

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    5. Re:Haha, oops :) by BenJCarter · · Score: 1

      Enforcement would be better than what we have now, but what happens when Chinese patents duplicate US patents? If this is an issue, it may do more to push American business to move manufacturing back to America than the current patent anarchy will.

      Could there be a Dirty Jobs iPhone manufacturing episode in our future?

      --
      For in politics, as in religion, it is equally absurd to aim at making proselytes by fire and sword. - Publius
    6. Re:Haha, oops :) by youn · · Score: 1

      No, they would have too much to lose. What exactly would happen, depends on many factors... but ideally they would lobby for different rules, make patents for obviousness a lot more difficult to obtain worldwide... probably through some secret treaty like acta

      --
      Never antropomorphize computers, they do not like that :p
    7. Re:Haha, oops :) by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      I'm curious how sending us stuff in exchange for only paper and never other stuff is harmful to us and helpful to them economically. Strategically, perhaps, but that's only if we ever go to war on opposing sides.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    8. Re:Haha, oops :) by nzac · · Score: 2

      That paper is still good for buying stuff that makes there economy stronger. If you have paper to burn and totalitarian authority then you can fix anything economy related. They can just stop their citizens from buying expensive stuff from overseas.

      You assume that the US would work if everyone though it was only paper. No one would trade oil, food and other stuff for paper. Just like no one would want just paper for their latest technology.

      Also its "paper" that stops the Chinese factories from seizing the fab plants and selling everything without R&D costs.

      No one has the balls (or ever should) to start a war between nuclear powers. Unless you can stop all the missiles (Russia thinks attempting to do this is a hostile act) you cannot win or benefit from open war.

    9. Re:Haha, oops :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're thinking the US will withdraw from the WIPO?

      If US followed what is agreed upon in WIPO, then that would be a good start, most crap US patents comes into existence because US don't. Most crap in WIPO is there because USA demanded it.

    10. Re:Haha, oops :) by Galestar · · Score: 1

      That's what you get when you have free trade and one country decides not to play by the rules. American corporations love free trade because it allows them to commoditize the populations of various countries. Its actually really bad for American citizens, but still so many people believe in it because they are told to believe in it.

      --
      AccountKiller
  9. China now top patent DEfiler by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 3, Funny

    Fixed that for you

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    1. Re:China now top patent DEfiler by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      China now top patent DEfiler

      I think the country with the highest number of patent trolls deserves that particular title don't you?

      (take a guess which country that is)

      --
      There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
  10. Patent on manufacturing ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they could patent the manufacturing of everything they produce, including the Idevices ;), i would laugh so hard...

  11. quality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "One thing is volume, quality is quite another..."

    Right. 'Cause, ya know, the U.S.A. cranks-out quality patents all day.

  12. % before the numbers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    its 54%, not %54

    get a brain morans

    1. Re:% before the numbers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      http://www.google.se/search?q=get+a+brain+morans

    2. Re:% before the numbers? by similar_name · · Score: 1

      A method for denoting a fraction of the whole by placing a percent sign after a number between 1 and 100 has been granted a patent. The submitter is obviously using an alternate method to prevent a lawsuit.

    3. Re:% before the numbers? by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 1

      Goddamnit. Too many memes.

      Thank you, you helpful swedish anon.

      --
      There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
  13. oh noes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Monkey see, monkey do. I think we've created a monster patent troll.

  14. U.S. grants a higher percentage? by HtR · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If anything, I would think that granting a higher percentage of patents is a sign of lower quality.

    But then again, I also don't see more patents as a rise in the "knowledge economy" or globalization lead by innovation.

    --
    Have you tried turning it off and on again?
    1. Re:U.S. grants a higher percentage? by scamper_22 · · Score: 1

      But you're not a lawyer or politician :P

  15. But by markdavis · · Score: 1

    >"China has passed the US as the number one filer of patents this year"

    Yes, but are they REAL patents or stupid, unfair, poor-quality software "concept" patents that have totally clogged the US system?

    1. Re:But by hackingbear · · Score: 1

      I believe Chian does not allow software patents.

    2. Re:But by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its does not.

  16. Who needs to start a company/business anymore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No need to start a company/business anymore, just file some generic patents that any retard could come up with, become aware of people infringing them but don't do anything except wait until they're ripe for suing for millions or billions, just like every other company around and then sue the crap out of everyone for millions of times more than you would have legitimately earned using your own patents.

    So lame what the patent system has turned into; generic patents, software patents, and any standard medical patents etc... should all just be made null and void, and anyone that tries to sue another company with one when they have no intention of using the patent themselves and just trolling should be jailed for it.

  17. China Bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok People let start the China bashing.

  18. Uh, oh... by Thangodin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Neil DeGrasse Tyson, in his talk at last years TAM, showed us a world map that illustrated the number of new scientific research papers filed by country. In 2000, the U.S. was still a leader. Then he showed the 2008 map, and the U.S. looked like a deflated balloon. My comment at the time was that primary research shows you applied research ten years down the road, and industrial innovation 20 years down the road. Guess I was right.

    Tyson's point was that the Bush administration's defunding of pure science was reflected in the map. Much as libertarians don't like to hear this, private research goes into low hanging fruit. Primary research is too risky, particularly since, if done right, it enters the public domain. Only a handful of companies do this (IBM and Google, take a bow--Apple and Microsoft, sit down.) Medical advances are particularly susceptible to this. The computer revolution came from NASA and the Apollo project, the internet came from DARPA funding of AT&T for the creation of resilient network (those same Bell labs are now beggars at the table of Alcatel, a French company.)

    Every other country that is a major player is spending a lot on primary research, and this funding is coming from the government. It's infrastructure, it lays the road for the business of the future, and its the one area where the government excels. China is spending a fortune on this, and we've exported all of our know how to them already, When IBM farms out manufacturing to another country, they send their engineers there to teach the manufacturers exactly what to do, and many other companies do exactly the same thing. They know almost everything we know, but we don't know everything they know--not anymore.

    The Greatest Generation, the people who grew up in the depression and fought the Axis, understood responsibility. They did a lot of things wrong, but they knew how to work together towards a better future, and our standard of living is the result of that. Can you imagine rubber and silk drives today? Americans couldn't even be bothered to pay higher taxes for Iraq and Afghanistan, even while they made noises about supporting the troops. It's time to grow up and carry not only our weight, but more than our weight, and pass a torch that burns brighter for our having held it. So the next time you hear the latest Fox demagogue complaining about taxes, and demanding lower taxes, imagine how his belly aching would have sounded in the 40's.

    1. Re:Uh, oh... by X-Power · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Maybe the reason was that the war with the axis had nothing to do with stealing resources from third world countries?

      I have a feeling if a genuine evil shows up, with a genuine threat to the american life, then the current generation will become the greatest generation + 1.

    2. Re:Uh, oh... by SpiralSpirit · · Score: 1

      genuine evil is hard to recognize, and the state of the media and propaganda today is totally different so that there will always be a counterpoint. In WW1 & 2 many people got their news from the radio and going to theaters. Nowadays most people have internet and can go to al-jazeera or whatever, assuming SOPA doesn't pass. Your genuine evil won't materialize till the economy is far past saving.

    3. Re:Uh, oh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's no point in asking for Chinese engineers to come to the US to teach what is already known. However, if it comes to pass that China has a process that is completely new and they want to sell it, then they will send engineers abroad and we can all gain from it.

      The older generations had different problems to deal with and need not have worried about ubiquitous video cameras catching the abuse of the troops in war. They had lots more petrol and a little bit of frontier left to explore. Now, the world is fuller and information right or wrong is almost universally accessible.

      The whole patent system can collapse for all I care. It used to be an incentive for the individual enterprising inventors of the industrial age. It is more of a hindrance and a corporate tool for artificial monopolies and lawsuits than a guarantee of reward for innovation.

    4. Re:Uh, oh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So the next time you hear the latest Fox demagogue complaining about taxes, and demanding lower taxes,

      Lower taxes can in fact, increase total revenues. It's called the Laffer curve.

      You're an idiot.

    5. Re:Uh, oh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you might be a bit biased toward your grandfather and his Bridge group...

      The generation(s) you speak of were no better and no worse than today's generations and the same applies for today's people in regards to the past. Something worth considering is whether previous generations had as many intangible battles to wage as those of today's existence. I'm talking about things pertaining to minuscule fine-print legalities we're all expected to read when we have reports to write for the classes that we're all told will make our lives better after pulling 8 hours of work each day (assuming we're lucky enough to even have a full-time job, that is). Disconnect your emotions for a second and recalibrate yourself using an increased amount of objective analysis and a decreased amount of prejudice, ageism resentment.

      You remind me of something my father once said...

      One day awhile back, we were both sitting around the house watching that movie "Memphis Belle" and he muttered something to me in the middle of it that I'll never forget... He said, "Those were REAL soldiers..."

      Real soldiers? What did that mean, I thought to myself...

      After I thought about it for awhile and dispensed my emotions from the comment, I came up with an answer... In a single sentence, he not only managed to disrespect an entire generation I grew up with and experienced life in, but he also managed to express zero appreciation for my brothers and sisters who have continued to do what they probably were forced to do against their will in some way for no other reason than waging a given war someone behind some desk told them to go fight. After all, we all have reasons to believe that today's twenty-somethings CHOOSE to go over to some barren land full of poverty-stricken villagers because "they want to be all they can be"...

      So what did I do when he said that to me? I just nodded my head in a way that struck a medium between apathy and lethargic acquiescence, but I thought to myself that he just put another notch in the wood of lost respect. His generation was obviously bred in a black-and-white womb of dichotomy, similar to so many others still alive today. The scary thing is that these types are the ones usually in charge.

      You see, past generation(s) had just as many stains on their sheets as ours do today. Some may see their "Great Depression" as a test of strength and wit with which they obviously passed successfully and with flying colors. They championed their dire circumstances and proved to all that they can overcome anything when they set their hearts and minds to it. Good for them! That's a real feather in their cap, right?

      Personally, I see it as something they could have prevented altogether had they had their heads out of their asses and did some basic math every now-and-again. I also see it as if it's something they should definitely be humbled from and almost embarrassed to bring up.

      They made it through those atrociously scary times where everyday normal people like you and I had almost no food to live off of. There is obviously a certain level of respect that comes with that for anyone who experienced with said trials, but does that mean that they should be automatically classed into a BETTER person category versus those of today? Surely not and to do so is implicit of everything I hate in today's world. They had an experience that most of us may never have. However, by no means does it mean that they're smarter, stronger, or overall "better"... It just means that their proverbial road banked left when ours seems to be curving in another direction. They had their trials and tribulations, we have ours to deal with. We'll never fully understand their challenges, but they'll never fully understand ours, too.

      Greatest generation? Please... There is no such thing. It's easy to assume that something is either one thing or the other, a winner or a loser, a 1 or 0... Anyone can judge another and make that conclusion and it often wins out because it's simpler; requires less energy an

    6. Re:Uh, oh... by JonySuede · · Score: 2

      Sorry to sounds like a monopolist apologist but Microsoft does it for pure CS. THE paper on monad from ms research is purely theoretical and yet F# and linq are influenced by it. The series of papers on UI from the team that made the courier experiment are top notch but it will take almost decade for them to percolate into production.

      --
      Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
    7. Re:Uh, oh... by JonySuede · · Score: 1

      Oh and more importantly I totally agree with the rest of your post !

      --
      Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
    8. Re:Uh, oh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you ever looked at a Laffer Curve*? It all depends on what the tax rate is. It's not lower taxes == increased revenue. Feel free to suggest what the optimal tax rate is, but don't call someone an idiot on the basis of such simplistic statement.

      *Laffer curve: t* represents the rate of taxation at which maximal revenue is generated. This is the curve as drawn by Laffer, but in reality the curve need not be single peaked nor symmetrical at 50%.

    9. Re:Uh, oh... by BenJCarter · · Score: 1

      When part of the funding goes to "science" like the crony BS churned out by the IPCC, I don't see spending cuts as all bad.

      Politically driven science is not science, it's politics.

      --
      For in politics, as in religion, it is equally absurd to aim at making proselytes by fire and sword. - Publius
    10. Re:Uh, oh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Take a reading comprehension class. Learn to follow threads.

      You're an idiot too.

    11. Re:Uh, oh... by zerojoker · · Score: 1

      Credit where credit is due: Microsoft has a huge research department, and is funding very basic and theoretical research in Computer Science. Quite In contrast, for example to Apple, which does not.

    12. Re:Uh, oh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Primary research is too risky, particularly since, if done right, it enters the public domain. Only a handful of companies do this (IBM and Google, take a bow--Apple and Microsoft, sit down.)

      Err... Microsoft do far more research than Google, or at least do a much better job of publishing it, and that gets more true as you move to the more theoretical end of things. True story: I was on the shadow PC for a conference recently, and one of shadow PC's favourite papers got rejected by the real PC, because it was from Microsoft and they couldn't find any experts on the subject matter who weren't working for Microsoft Research, so couldn't find anyone competent to do a proper review. Google, on the other hand, basically don't exist, at least as far as published research in this particular sub-field is concerned.

      You're right about IBM and Apple, though.

    13. Re:Uh, oh... by FhnuZoag · · Score: 1

      ARGH PLEASE. The Laffer curve is absolute garbage. GARBAGE. I don't care if I get downmodded for this, but it needs to be said. It's based on a fundamental delusion - that because you know that the two ends of the graph is at 0, the curve in between those two points must be some smooth determinable surface with a single obvious maximum. Reality follows the neo laffer curve. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Neo-Laffer_curve.svg

    14. Re:Uh, oh... by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      How come everyone who brings up the Laffer curve seems to bring in the assumption that we're on the right side of the curve. Isn't it possible that we're actually on the left side so to increase revenue we'd need to increase tax rates?

      Take a look at the tax rates over the last 70 years, and the governments revenue over the same period. In general taxes have been reduces and revenue has been reduced (spending hasn't but that's a topic for another day.) That seems to me to be a fairly good argument that taxes should be a little higher.

    15. Re:Uh, oh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Okay, I don't know enough about economics to know whether the Laffer curve is at all resembling reality or not... but that graph fails to argue against it.
      1. Simply drawing a line between points which form a sample and pointing out that they don't make a curve proves little other than that the author of the graph either doesn't understand statistics or (more likely) is willfully ignoring statistics in order to intentionally misrepresent the data. That data actually does show a visible weak correlation between being closer to the middle of the chart and having higher revenue.
      2. I don't know how that chart is measuring tax rate. The fact that the United States is labeled as having the second highest tax rate behind only France (and only slightly) makes me highly suspect of the measurement used.
      3. The Laffer curve is supposed to represent tax rate vs. revenue with all else held constant. All of those countries have very different economic and other policies which could significantly influence their revenue. It is very unclear how to isolate those factors to attempt to make a fair evaluation of Laffer's theory.
    16. Re:Uh, oh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google seems to be trying to be serious about research overall, and not even just in CS... although I don't know how much they have actually published. They have their whole Google X Lab and the driverless car project, but they seem to be strangely secretive about most of their research. I did read a few papers from Google in a systems course I took (on GFS and BigTable).

    17. Re:Uh, oh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How come everyone who brings up the Laffer curve seems to bring in the assumption that we're on the right side of the curve.

      I would point to my comment, where I said, "lower taxes *can in fact* increase revenues" and pointed out the laffer curve, which is of course theoretical, but slashdot erased my post.

      This is the ultimate in group think. Censored, on slashdot, by the people who constantly cry about censorship and free speech and constitutional violations of their right to pirate everyone elses work, for pointing out that higher taxes != increased revenues, and then getting responses from people who didn't comprehend what I said and argued "lower taxes != increased revenues."

      True colors ... you can't hide them. You're all idiots and hypocrites.

    18. Re:Uh, oh... by Darby · · Score: 0

      assuming SOPA doesn't pass. Your genuine evil won't materialize till the economy is far past saving.

      The fact that something so far out on the fascist fringe was even proposed in Congress without those proposing it being dragged out and shot in the street as tyrants and traitors demonstrates conclusively that the genuine evil has already long since materialized.

    19. Re:Uh, oh... by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      /. never deleted your post. It's right here:http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2585724&cid=38455774
      It is my understanding that /. never deletes posts unless they are required to by law (DMCA notices etc.)

      Free speech doesn't mean you get to say what you think and not have anyone argue with you. Free speech means that you say what you think, then I say what I think, and everyone is free to make up their own minds on the basis of the facts presented.

  19. Patent problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I still think more patents brings more problem that its solve.
    More patents could bring patent litigation for trivials things and stiffle innovation, like in the U.S.

  20. I'm not surprised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    China is the perennial champion of the International Math Olympiad.
    I always contend that math is he mother of all sciences.

    1. Re:I'm not surprised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  21. prefix or postfix? by robvangelder · · Score: 3, Informative

    The % sign does not appear before the number. Please do not make me angry.

    1. Re:prefix or postfix? by MoronGames · · Score: 1

      I came in here to post the same thing. How many people actually write that way?

      --
      hey!
    2. Re:prefix or postfix? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The same number of people that don't know the proper way of writing it.

  22. China filed more patents than the US... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...all of which were stolen from the US by Chinese hackers! ;)

  23. They've patented... by forkfail · · Score: 1

    ... stealing from IBM, stealing from Amazon, stealing from Google, stealing from Yahoo, stealing from Microsoft, stealing from... well, pretty much everybody.

    --
    Check your premises.
  24. Correct by sonamchauhan · · Score: 2

    And higher taxes may increase revenue...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve

    Economist Paul Pecorino presented a model in 1995 that predicted the peak of the Laffer curve occurred at tax rates around 65%.[12] A 1996 study by Y. Hsing of the United States economy between 1959 and 1991 placed the revenue-maximizing tax rate (the point at which another marginal tax rate increase would decrease tax revenue) between 32.67% and 35.21%.[13] A 1981 paper published in the Journal of Political Economy presented a model integrating empirical data that indicated that the point of maximum tax revenue in Sweden in the 1970s would have been 70%.[14] A recent paper by Trabandt and Uhlig of the NBER presented a model that predicted that the US and most European economies are on the left of the Laffer curve (in other words, that raising taxes would raise further revenue).[15] The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics reports that for academic studies, the mid-range for the revenue maximizing rate is around 70%.[16]

    However, a study by Teather and Young of the conservative Adam Smith Institute using evidence from the Republic of Ireland has suggested that the optimal rate for capital gains tax, as opposed to income tax, may be around 20%, but this is at least partly due to savvy taxpayers holding onto assets in anticipation of tax rates being lowered in the future.[17] A 2007 study by the conservative think tank, the American Enterprise Institute, found that the revenue maximizing rate for corporate taxes in OECD countries was about 26%, down from about 34% in the 1980s.[18]

  25. Yeah that was my first thought too by Weaselmancer · · Score: 2

    Except I'm not worried about bias, I'm thinking that if the Chinese get enough patents to lock the United States out of their own patent system that will be the state of affairs that finally sinks the whole software patent thing. If you have to send two bucks to China every time you write a Hello World program, maybe that will finally display just how broken the system is.

    Once large corporate interests figure out that patents cost them more than they help them, that's when reform will suddenly become important. So GO CHINA and torpedo the whole thing! Best of luck to you guys.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
    1. Re:Yeah that was my first thought too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We can just ignore the Chinese patents, they never respected ours.....

  26. Will we finally.... by apcullen · · Score: 1

    Now that china has learned how to file obvious patents and make them sound kinda novel, will we have meaningful patent reform?

  27. "intellectual property" sounds weird... by steamengine · · Score: 1

    What your mind creates should not be anyone's property, not even your own. If you want complete control over your ideas and creations, keep them to yourself. Once knowledge is out, it's out, you do not own it, and neither do I.

    1. Re:"intellectual property" sounds weird... by tehcyder · · Score: 2

      What your mind creates should not be anyone's property, not even your own. If you want complete control over your ideas and creations, keep them to yourself. Once knowledge is out, it's out, you do not own it, and neither do I.

      Bollocks, if I write a poem, then it is my creation. Until we live in a communist society based on "from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs" I need to be able to earn money from that creation in exactly the same way a lawyer does.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    2. Re:"intellectual property" sounds weird... by steamengine · · Score: 1

      Of course your poem is your creation, but you cannot own words.

      In the current system I can have an idea, "register" it, and then either preclude implementations, or sell a lousy implementation myself and keep other people from improving on it.

      I have no idea where your communist catchphrase enters the picture...

    3. Re:"intellectual property" sounds weird... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The idea was that in return for publishing your bright idea so others can learn from (and improve upon) it, you get a temporary exclusive right to use it. The basic idea actually makes sense, shame that's not how it works...

  28. they can have it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    given the fucked up state of the American patent system, the patent system is now a hindrance rather than a stimulus to innovation.

  29. You are clueless by Weezul · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes, quality counts in academic papers, but .. crappiness counts in patents.

    Yes, crappiness mildly obstructs obtaining the patent, fine file more patents. Yet, crappiness is an incredible asset once you obtaing the patent, but the more overboard, the more people you can sue.

    --
    The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
  30. Chinese are thieves by rconaway · · Score: 1

    Most of their patents probably originated here anyway. They were most likely stolen off U.S. computers from the thousands of companies that they hacked into. I wouldn't issue a Chinese patent in the U.S. until I did a background check on what company they stole it from. I'm also wondering how much longer we are going to put up with this crap.

  31. Foreign Patents in China by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

    How many of these are patents that were filed in other countries than China that are now being filed in China by the Chinese? i.e. not new design / research / etc but grabbing the rights to such 'inside' China.

    --
    blindly antisocialist = antisocial
  32. Oh but this is in CHINA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot never fails to amaze me with the latent imperialist streak.

    Our patents are a bit eccentric
    Your patents are uninspired and frivolous
    Their patents are blatant plagiarism

    Basement-dwelling armchair scientists the lot of you.

  33. Use this math thing by __aancvu2993 · · Score: 0

    According to a recent breakthrough called 'math' 314,000 patents in a year gives me 1,000 patents per day.

    Can we put an end to crappy slashjournalism?, or citation needed. Not commenting on the quality of the patents. I don't care. I want to see sources in these 'news'.

  34. Call me crazy but... by dadioflex · · Score: 1

    Maybe patents should be made harder to get. Obvious, right? With millions of patents being added every year and hundreds of millions already in effect, the system has become so convoluted that the little man inventor, the only person supposedly benefiting from a relatively cheap patenting process, doesn't stand a chance of enforcing his patent or even being sure that it's valid. Charge a million dollars for patents and use the money to buy health insurance for families, or cat food for sickly hedgehogs or something equally worthy.

  35. %54? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least good ole USA still has the patents on "Method for correct placement of percentage (%) signs at the posterior of a numeral"

  36. Reciprocative enforcement. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    pertaining to China, I say we enforce patents, copyrights, trademarks and piracy with the same level that China does for us; almost non-existant.